Stabilised binoculars

henryf

henryf

Well-Known Member
Joined
31 May 2007
Messages
4,752
Location
Uxbridge
www.911virgin.com
I was going to add this to the "what did you buy at the boat show" thread but thought I would start a separate thread as I'm probably not the only persons who's toyed with stabilised binoculars. I bought a pair of Canon 10x30 is binoculars.


I've put up a bit of review and also a short video which shows the stabilisation in action here: www.charter-solent.co.uk/canon-10x30-is-binoculars.php

I will say filming the results isn't easy so in the real world the results are much better. They also fit the eye well meaning you get a perfect image rather than suffering one eye "dropping out". Adjusting the eye width (interpupillary distance) was really quick and easy.

It was useful to try out a few different binoculars at the boat show, going into a shop you only have a limited choice and being outside I got to test them in the real world.

In the end I paid £300 for the Canon 10x30 is Binoculars (£20 off and a pack of batteries because they had been on display). I looked at the much more expensive (£1,000) 15x50 and 18x50 models but simply couldn't justify the extra money. Weatherproofing on the more expensive is improved but to honest the cheap ones I've had for the last 20 years have never got wet so hopefully all will be well.


Henry :)
 
+1. I have some of those Canons as a kind present from a boat guest and they're fantastic. I like them very much and use them all the time
 
Thanks Henry I have often toyed with the thought of these but wondered how good they were, great review.

Last year I wanted a better pair of conventional Binoculars for the boat and did quite a bit of research, you can spend big bucks on top end binos but as you say they are on a boat used occasionally. After lots of reviews I plumped for Vangaurd Endeavors, they are not Leica's but I am chuffed given the price.

http://www.bestbinocularsreviews.com/vanguard-binoculars.php

Had I know what I know now I would have gone for the Canon IS. I expect they may see a sales uplift given your review :p
 
NGM said:
Thanks Henry, I was looking for a new pair, saves me doing the research !
Click to expand...

As much as anything don't be afraid to not spend £1,000 !!

The problem is I can see myself wanting more than 1 pair. A set on the boat, a set in the flat (we overlook Portsmouth harbour) and possibly a set at home to monitor the lakes and take traveling !

Henry :)
 
I'm please I'm not the only one then. You feel a bit odd buying them given the thousands of pairs of standard binoculars out there, almost a bit of a mug but as we all seem to agree they really are a revelation.

Henry :)
 
Raggie here
On passage last year found I could see the bouys but not identify them by (really excellent) Monk binoculars as the movement was too much. On a motor boat must be much worse I imagine
Got second-hand pair of image stabilising Fujinons (think 10*30) and, whilst the optics are nowhere near the Monk's, overall it is far better. If you are perfectly still then a great pair of ordinary binoculars are all you need but once moving, IS is the way !
 
henryf said:
In the end I paid £300 for the Canon 10x30 is Binoculars (£20 off and a pack of batteries because they had been on display). I looked at the much more expensive (£1,000) 15x50 and 18x50 models but simply couldn't justify the extra money.
Click to expand...
While I agree that the higher magnification alone isn't worth spending more, two seasons after I purchased a Fujinon 14x40 (see http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?353407), I'm positive that its stabilization system is better than the Canon.
Not only I got such impression when I tried both brands, before eventually purchasing the Fuji, but in the meantime I've had onboard a friend who brought his brand new 12x36 Canon IS II (which btw he paid more than I paid the Fuji, though the comparison is not fair as I bought mine in the US), and we had the opportunity to compare them carefully.
Long story short, he fully agreed that the Fuji stabilization performs better. And the worse the conditions, the more noticeable the difference is.

Mind, I'm not saying that the Canon isn't good, by all means. It is indeed an excellent bit of kit, and the difference vs. anything non-stabilized is like night and day, no matter how good and expensive the non-stabilized thing can be.
But if anyone is interested in purchasing a stabilized bino, and has the opportunity to get a Fuji at US price (or doesn't mind paying the ridiculous EU price), I would definitely recommend to check it out, before going for anything else.
 
Poecheng said:
Raggie here
On passage last year found I could see the bouys but not identify them by (really excellent) Monk binoculars as the movement was too much. On a motor boat must be much worse I imagine
Got second-hand pair of image stabilising Fujinons (think 10*30) and, whilst the optics are nowhere near the Monk's, overall it is far better. If you are perfectly still then a great pair of ordinary binoculars are all you need but once moving, IS is the way !
Click to expand...

Hi raggie! The best way for identifying a buoy (if your gps is broke or you don't trust it) is a big zoom camera on rapid fire. One of the pics will have the buoy, and you can zoom in on that.
 
MapisM said:
While I agree that the higher magnification alone isn't worth spending more, two seasons after I purchased a Fujinon 14x40 (see http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?353407), I'm positive that its stabilization system is better than the Canon.
Click to expand...

That matches what I've read online - apparently the Canon system adjusts the image using gel-filled flexible prisms whose shape is carefully distorted for the desired effect, whereas the Fujinon has glass prisms in little power-driven gimbals. As well as giving a slightly clearer picture, these can also move further (several degrees) than the Canon (fraction of one degree) and so compensate for bigger movements. One review said that the Canon was good for shaky hands, but the Fujinon was necessary for moving vehicles (obviously this isn't entirely true as the Canon is still better than non-IS even in a moving boat).

That said, the Fuji ones seem to be about three times the price of the Canon, so it's not surprising they're better.

I could just possibly justify the £300-odd Canons, nothing significantly more than that. But almost every time I pick up the binos I use the built-in compass, and there don't seem to be any IS binoculars that include one. So I guess I'm staying with the no-name 7x50s for now.

Pete
 
NGM said:
Thanks Henry, I was looking for a new pair, saves me doing the research !
Click to expand...

+1

Thanks Henry

I went to the same stand at the boat show but the bloke didn't even mention them in the 10 or 15 minutes I was there trying out various pairs. I guess he saw you and thought this is man I can sell a £1000 pair of bins to but when he saw me thought "tyre kicker" :)
 
prv said:
That said, the Fuji ones seem to be about three times the price of the Canon, so it's not surprising they're better.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I did say that the Fuji "normal" price is OTT, and I bought it only because I had a chance to pay it much less.
Otoh, a fair comparison with Canon would be with the 15x50, which is even more expensive, or at least with the 12x36, which is only slightly cheaper.
But yes, the difference with the Canon 10x30 is indeed relevant, which makes it probably the best choice from a price/performance standpoint.
 
+1 for the Canon 10x30 stabilised bins. Excellent piece of kit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top